For the third time in three weeks, climate alarmists are blaming atmospheric aerosols for lousy climate modeling.
A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences claims that satellite-based projections of aerosols’ effect on Earth’s climate significantly underestimate the aerosols’ impacts, thereby masking the effects of atmospheric greenhouse gas buildup.
I guess it’s a good thing no one rushed to commit trillions of dollars we don’t have to policies based on models that aren’t ready for prime time.
A new study … claims that satellite-based projections of aerosols’ effect on Earth’s climate significantly underestimate the aerosols’ impacts, thereby masking the effects of atmospheric greenhouse gas buildup.
However, our clever computer modellers have added further epicycles to make them match a poorly observed reality.
This is good news. They are apparently running out of ideas in their Official Goreball Warming Alarmism for Fun and Profit Handbook!!
Yes, Los Angeles was so much cooler in the 1960’s. /sarc
It is pathetic that PNAS would publish this specious garbage.
I thought this global warming thingy was supposed to be global.
I live in Australia – we still have pristine blus skies once you get away from our cities. I went to China Korea and Japan a few years ago when China had shut down most of the coal fired power stations for the Olympics – couldn’t see more than a few kilometres on a bright sunny day two hours drive away from Beijing.
No doubting pollution but I still have not had a decent explanation of exactly how 0.04% of the atmosphere controls climate.
They simply keep repeating the “greenhouse gas” mantra as if the rest of the atmosphere doesn’t get hot and doesn’t radiate.